Posted on 01/01/2014 2:29:20 PM PST by Foundahardheadedwoman
Comment is free
I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on Few of the politicians who so brazenly proclaim the benefits of drones have a real clue how it actually works (and doesn't)
Share 51006 117 inShare158 Email
Anonymous woman on grey Heather Linebaugh theguardian.com, Sunday 29 December 2013 07.30 EST Jump to comments (2811)
Hermes 450 drone An Elbit Systems Hermes 450 drone. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images
Whenever I read comments by politicians defending the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Predator and Reaper program – aka drones – I wish I could ask them a few questions. I'd start with: "How many women and children have you seen incinerated by a Hellfire missile?" And: "How many men have you seen crawl across a field, trying to make it to the nearest compound for help while bleeding out from severed legs?" Or even more pointedly: "How many soldiers have you seen die on the side of a road in Afghanistan because our ever-so-accurate UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] were unable to detect an IED [improvised explosive device] that awaited their convoy?"
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
Rise of the machines!
There are cells in the US. What if that safe place or refuge is your backyard neighbor? You don't mind having your leg blown off as collateral damage then, right? Maybe just a hand? Cool? Thanks.
I form no conclusions based on this article, but everyone should deplore the collateral damage that is and has always been a part of war. War should only be entered into with the authorization of Congress, and if that happens, this is no more Obama’s fault than it was Bush’s or any other President operating under a declaration of war. If not, it is a war crime.
That said, I’d rather see enemy casualties than US Soldiers. Especially when the enemy includes combatants as young as < 10 years old.
Don't be a fool. Our government isn't harboring terrorists. We are not using drones in Europe or other allied countries. Nor are we using them in places like Iran for geopolitical reasons. We are using them in places where the host government has either tacitly approved their use or where the government is unable to control their own territory.
Again, what countries are you referring to where we are currently using drones and should not be? Stop avoiding the question by nonsensical examples like use in the US.
Drones have turned warfare into a deskbound video game. Here we have our troops on the ground saddles with the most restrictive ROE in history, yet the wholesale slaughter of families is dismissed as collateral damage.
saddles=saddled
War sucks. There's things worse than drones.
What I find interesting is how the American people’s perception of the military and it’s hardware has changed.
Previously, new tech for our military was regarded as a good thing. The only negative comments I used to see about it were people that believed it was a waste of money.
Only in recent years have I seen people worry that these war machines would be turned on American citizens. I don’t blame them for worrying.
There will never be a weapon which will not eventually be used against the people that weapon was meant to protect - and yes, I fully expect obongo to nuke a U.S. city in a false flag event in order to retain power. In the meantime, eat hellfire you damned bitter clingers and “terrorists” who revere the Constitution.
Cry me a river. We have LOST 2301 killed and 17,674 wounded in Afghanistan; 4,486 killed and 32,223 wounded in Iraq, over 2,000 on 9/11, and many other deaths such as Ft. Hood, Benghazi, and at the Boston marathon. And these figures don't include the deaths of our coalition allies in Iraq and Afghanistan or the losses suffered due todomestic attacks by the terrorists. And you are concerned about the "wholesale slaughter" of families.
You need to get your priorities straight. This war is not over either here or abroad. The enemy will kill more Americans including families. Collateral damage is part of war and we have caused far less than the monsters who are blowing up innocent people all over the world. No one is dismissing collateral damage, but put it in context for God's sake.
Drones give us an advantage over these troglodytes and they don't make "warfare into a desk-bound video game" any more than smart bombs and Tomahawk missiles do. Drones put fewer of our people at risk while still achieving our objectives. As someone who has actually participated in a war, I welcome drones and any other technology that will help us protect this country and destroy its enemies. Your attitude stinks.
Fight to win, or get out. And if you get out, be prepared to suffer the consequences of defeat. Dragging a war out is the cruelest thing possible. The misery is never ending. I think we should give every illegal alien forty acres in Afghanistan with the stipulation that they must live on the land and hold it for ten years. Then, they can come back as citizens....if they want to.
You missed my point... widely. Once again, here it is.. why are our military warfighters’ hands tied by hyper-restrictive ROE when the use of drones, which can splash anyone at anytime with impunity, perfectly acceptable?
And don’t lecture to me about priorities.
OK. Never mind. Sorry.
And as far as drones making warfare "a desk-bound video game," that is a crock of sh*t usually spouted by some liberal a##hole. It suggests a lack of seriousness and responsibility on the part of our military. In fact, the Guardian article makes just the opposite case if you believe the author. The drone operators are being affected emotionally by what they are doing.
You have served as have I. I really have a hard time understanding why you believe the US is slaughtering families on a wholesale basis. We just don't operate that way, Obama or no Obama.
Still no reply on what countries we should stop using drone strikes.
Being able to shwack bad guys with impunity is what it’s all about, isn’t it? Supremacy in the battle space is the objective and killing the enemy without getting killed is what we all hope for.
How is the use of the UAV any different from using strike aircraft or helicopters as CAS? The way I see it, it is safer and much more cost effective than maintaining a CAS stack.
I had buddies and acquaintances who loved having a Predator overhead because they knew the loiter time was forever and the crew provided not only real time intel, but could also provide personalized attention to the bad guys in a pinch.
Finally, an Air Force dude should love the precision that UAV provided on the battlefield. Collateral damage is held to a minimum even on tactical
strikes because of the precision that a Hellfire provides. This is a far cry from wiping cities slick ala Bomber Harris in WW II.
Nope. You’re right.
I get all that... my point was WHY are such strict ROEs applied to ground troops, in which the slightest error can result in UCMJ action, yet those same requirements are overlooked in drone application?
I’m all for schwacking the bad guys as much as anyone, but if we’re OK with taking out the “collateral damage” (i.e. noncombatants) around them, why are guys on the ground restricted to the point of lethal peril to them?
Just addressing the inconsistencies here.
Best idea for killing two birds with one stone, I ever heard. Illegal alien problem here and ending the war there. Damn brilliant.
Let me ask a question, remember the Commies always lied about their capabilities in every area of spying and warfare,for that matter their wheat and corn harvests, any reason we should believe Obozo and his cronies about the US capabilities to kick our collective asses with all these star war gizmos? Can you thing of any other instance when these punks have told the truth about anything? Personally I wonder if this isn’t just another form of intimidation being leaked to his buddies in the press.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.